Wales 0-2 England: Lampard and Bent seal the victory early on

England recorded a comfortable victory over Wales at the Millennium Stadium.

Gary Speed sent Wales out in a broad 4-5-1 system. Craig Bellamy started on the right, with Andy King on the left. Aaron Ramsey, in his first game as captain, lined up behind Steve Morison.

Fabio Capello named a surprising starting XI. Ashley Young was given a game on the wing, with Wayne Rooney also out wide, off Darren Bent. Michael Dawson partnered returning captain John Terry at the back.

England effectively won the game in the first 20 minutes – that silenced the crowd, and probably ruined Wales’ gameplan too.

England positive with the ball…

England’s ball retention was very good throughout the match, especially as the game was played on a poor surface. The use of three central midfielders (something Capello had experimented with in friendlies, but had yet to try in a competitive game) worked very well, and England always had options in possession.

Rooney and Young were given free-ish roles (though defended the wide areas without the ball) – allowed to stay wide, or come inside and link play – Rooney tended to start higher up the pitch but ended up dropping deeper as moves progressed, whilst Young focused on breaking forward into the channels, getting in behind the full-backs and drawing the centre-backs out of position. He was responsible for ‘creating’ both the goals – being brought down for the penalty, and then crossing for Bent for the second.

Wales didn’t help themselves in the way they defended – the full-backs (particularly Danny Collins at left-back) came too high up the pitch and were also too wide, making it too easy for England to play balls between defenders. Glen Johnson’s pass for the second goal, for example, was excellent – but Wales were opened up with two passes from the halfway line to the six-yard box. Better defensive positioning wouldn’t have allowed that.

…and proactive without

England were equally impressive when defending – they pressed effectively, and made it impossible for Wales to play the ball forward in the first half. The layouts of the two midfielders meant that each player had an individual opponent to pick up, and therefore England closed down easily – Scott Parker marked Ramsey, with Frank Lampard and Jack Wilshere closing down higher up. Wales only had a man in space at the back, and that’s where most of their passing took place early on.

With Wales struggling to get the ball forward, Ramsey increasingly came deep, dropping between his two fellow central midfielders, and picking up possession in space. With Parker not tracking him and staying in the holding position, this meant Wales briefly had a 3 v 2 situation deep in their midfield, but it didn’t really solve their problems for two reasons – (a) because Ramsey was the ‘link’ player and therefore Morison became even more isolated, and (b) because Ramsey’s passing was poor early on, and he frequently gave the ball away. The midfield trio lacked fluidity – if another midfielder had moved forward when Ramsey dropped deep, they might have opened up England. Instead, Wales played in front of them.

Wales rarely threaten

Parker was England’s best player, showing discipline and restraint in the deep-lying role – something England haven’t had for a long time. It also allowed Wilshere and Lampard forward – they dovetailed in going forward and linking up with the front three, and both looked more comfortable than their England appearances this season in a midfield four.

Wales’ problems in getting the ball forward weren’t helped by Morison’s poor game. His first touch was terrible, meaning he rarely (if ever) held the ball up, so Wales never got up the pitch. The home side’s brightest moments came when Bellamy and King didn’t look to play in Morison, and instead played the ball to each other – particularly after they switched wings. Three times in a 15-minute spell either side of the break, Bellamy dribbled from the left flank into the centre, then played a clever pass to King in behind Ashley Cole – but the moves didn’t produce clear-cut chances.

The second half was almost completely uneventful – aside from various substitutions (which didn’t really alter the flow of the game, though David Vaughan showed some good moments and probably should have started) and lots of bookings.

Wales came into the game more and got into the England third of the pitch (this may have been caused primarily by England’s pressing becoming less intense), but lacked penetration. England had opportunities to counter but their transitions were poor – lazy, perhaps – and they didn’t really look to get a third.

Conclusion

Wales were poor, but England did their job very well. In possession they were assured and moved the ball forward nicely, whilst they also pressed well with the ‘new’ formation – something they wouldn’t have been able to do as well in a 4-4-2, as they would have been passed around in the centre of midfield.

The most encouraging performance came from Parker, who gave England balance in midfield and protection ahead of the back four.

Wales lacked quality in the final third – with no Bale and Ramsey not at 100%, they barely tested Joe Hart.

65 Responses to “ Wales 0-2 England: Lampard and Bent seal the victory early on ”

Very fair analysis as usual. Would agree with Parker as MOTM, although Wilshere were good too.

Definitely a strong defensive performance from Glen Johnson – he seems to be a lot more assured these days. Read my thoughts on him, Andy Carroll, Steven Gerrard, and more, at my new LFC tactics blog: http://crowdgobananes.blogspot.com/

How about at RB? I thought he did well today. Though he generally does when he doesn’t have to defend much.

Great username, by the way…

PartridgeAmongThePigeons on March 26, 2011 at 6:34 pm

johnson’s a genuinely great asset to england at RB i believe, offers some good penetration (although he’s not actually that good at dribbling if you watch him closely). would make a good winger and his defending hasn’t been bad recently.

Danny on March 26, 2011 at 8:04 pm

To be honest I think Martin Kelly is a better option when fit.

derekdigby on March 27, 2011 at 12:11 pm

i missed the first half hour or so but i saw Johnson give the ball away numerous times. thought he was poor in possession

Elwood on March 26, 2011 at 6:32 pm

Glad to have you back!

England looked good, as they always do in lower-stakes games, I’m very interested to see if this become Capello’s standard formation against tougher opponents.

3rnald0 on March 28, 2011 at 12:34 pm

should play a 4-3-3 every game

kev on March 26, 2011 at 6:45 pm

this formation seems to suit england a lot more than the 4-4-2 type formation we’ve mostly been playing

the build-up play was a lot more fluid with 3 in midfield. i don’t want to be too harsh on darren bent, but i think he’s too one-dimensional to be a long term solution up front.

i’d like to see this formation with wayne rooney as a ‘false 9′ dropping deep and making space for the wingers and lampard to exploit further forward

Steve on March 26, 2011 at 7:09 pm

Definitely agree about Rooney. He had a poor game today for the most part. I’d rather see him as false 9 with Walcott/Young/Lennon (depending on who’s fit) supporting him.

I’m slightly concerned though by Capello’s comments after the game. He said he played 4-3-3 because of the matches he’s seen Wales play. I hope that doesn’t mean he’s going to switch back to 4-4-2 after this!

Interesting to see the trio of Parker, Wilshire and Lampard. I actually think that could be England’s best starting centre of midfield (although arguably an in-form Hargreaves would replace Parker, unlikely as that is)

I’m not really a Gerrard fan – I feel he doesn’t have much in the way of a true football mind and Lampard is simply a better option – better for the team. Gerrard is too “swashbuckling”

Rooney on the left is fairly interesting as well. It gets away from the age-old problem of if you don’t play 4-4-2, it must be Rooney as the lone frontman. I think getting him to cut in on his right and run at defenders is a good one, although obviously limits width (which Cole should in theory provide)

It’s a system with loads of options – Walcott/Lennon on right, Joe Cole (?) on left, Gerrard for Lampard, Carrick for Wilshire, Crouch for Bent and plenty others unmentioned. Also can’t argue with the back 5 (although Rio et al obv preferred to Dawson)

Wales were bloody dire though and Coleman’s shite seemed to exacerbate the pain.

Mark on March 26, 2011 at 7:35 pm

Not much to give credit for, but not really too much to criticise either. England just did the job, but Wales were very poor.

Defence did very little wrong, but as is mentioned, Morison offered little/no threat.

Midfield looked good, no co-incidence that a good midfield performance comes when the completely useless Barry doesn’t play, Parker played his role very well, showed for the ball, kept his position well, and helped with the good pressing England produced today. Don’t need to say too much about Wilshire, I know England have a habit of building players up to be world beaters when their not, but Jack Wilshire really is some player. Nice passing, good touch and control, can dribble, and he isn’t afraid to put himself about a bit, fantastic talent.

Was suprised to see Young playing, I’m a big fan of Lennon myself, but Young did well to be fair, however, I have said for ages, Young is best on the right hand side, where he can use his pace to get in behind, and doesn’t have to keep cutting in and doing fuck all with his left foot. Inverted wingers are popular these days, but I think players who are technically good are best suited to the role, Nasri is probably the best example I could give, a player who is pretty quick, but doesn’t rely on his pace. Young isn’t the most technically gifted, but his pace/movement can make him an effective player.

11 changes for the Ghana game apparantly, not massively bothered, but I think Wilshire should play, help continue his learning, and adaption to the international game. Be nice to see how Jarvis fares at international level, and also Carroll. Jarvis whipping in balls for Carroll, sounds good to me…

Joef on March 28, 2011 at 10:15 pm

“I think Wilshire should play”

clearly not an arsenal fan

David on March 26, 2011 at 7:36 pm

I think Ramsey’s problem is that he’s still easing back into top level football. He only just made his first start for Arsenal since the injury – for the previous two months, he was playing in the Championship like the majority of his teammates. Against West Brom, he looked a bit nervous (and of course, Arsenal conceded an early goal that day too) but he was sort of the junior man in midfield, so it wasn’t a big deal. Then suddenly, next game he’s the captain and focal point of the attack, in a derby of huge importance.

as a neutral (albeit an Arsenal fan), I think Speed made the right call for the future (it’s not like the other mooted choices, James Collins and Ashley Williams, played that well today), but Wales are gonna have a few hiccups like this on the way.

also, Wilshere’s performance was very positive. and I heard Capello is going to make 11 changes for the Ghana friendly, so knock on wood, he’ll come back to Arsenal in one piece!

one guy on March 26, 2011 at 8:26 pm

are wales that bad or is their manager that bad? they were shockingly bad.

mario on March 26, 2011 at 8:29 pm

both…lol

3rnald0 on March 28, 2011 at 12:35 pm

gary speed is rubbish….worst organisation from any team ive seen

Barnesy10 on March 26, 2011 at 10:23 pm

As ZM mentioned in analysis: England retained the ball better than in previous qualifiers; but, unfortunately, ball retention and creativity are two completely different things. England were one-paced and the players lack the game intelligence of their international counterparts. It took till the the 37th minute for their to be a coherent transition from defence, through midfield and which resulted in an over hit Wilshere pass to Bent through the middle.

This particular move utilised a trademark Barcelona aesthetic -more by mistake than design mind you- of feeding the ball into the middle of the park, attract opposition players to the ball, recycle the ball out of a tight spot and find the gaps which said oppo players have vacated. This type of play requires an assured first touch, movement and incisive passing.

That this move occurred only once in the first half is of no surprise; Parker nearly lost the ball during this move when in a tight spot. Credit to him though, as he had a good game; but, my admiration for the likes of Xavi, Iniesta et al went up another notch on this display as they routinely perform these movements and skills with no fuss.

It would be nice to comment that these moves were part of the design of this England side, but their lack of ideas when transitioning the ball from defence into midfield suggests otherwise. Top club and international sides will shuffle the ball along the back line, pop a ball into a midfield, receive it back, patiently trying to create the space with which to launch an attack. Once the ball finds itself at the feet of an English full-back – move over. A hoof down the line or a pass to Terry, who in turn passes to Hart to punt down the field. Not all defences will be as accommodating as this Welsh one which conspired to make Johnson look like Glenn Hoddle.

The only player who seemed to have an innate game awareness, an unenglishness if you like, was Jack Wilshere; and even he resorted to uncharacteristic hopeful balls over the top. I’m afraid that until England produce players that are mentally in tune with the pace of top club and international football, they won’t even compete for the top prizes let alone win anything.

And another thing, Rooney was hopeless, the worst player in an England shirt – again. His poor form has continued on into a second year. If Coleen doesn’t go easy on him soon I hope that Capello has the balls to having him sit next to his current peers: Downing; Carroll etc.

Ryan on March 26, 2011 at 10:59 pm

Barnesy10, I think your assessment is a tad unfair. Which teams *aren’t* going to look a tad inferior in comparison to Barcelona?!

I do think you expect too much from England… considering the size and population of the nation compared to others, England consistantly punch above their weight. True, they are not likely to win major honors any time soon, but then neither are countries such as, say, Russia, which has a much larger population to choose from and more in the way of resources.

Don’t castigate England for not being one of the best footballing nations… rather praise them for remaining close to the top nations depite their deficiences. England are the international equivalent of a team like Everton – that they do so well in the face of brilliant competition (numerous major quarter-finals in recent years isn’t a record to be sniffed at) is something to be lauded, not ridiculed.

Diverinho on March 26, 2011 at 11:16 pm

England is not a nation, it’s an idea from the past. I suggest an initiative for the UKFA, or the GBFA, however you like to call it. Form a real national team/association from all of the British ‘provinces’, ie. England, Scotland, Wales, N.Ireland. Sounds silly considering how the Welsh and Scots feel about England, but – wouldn’t it be nice to throw Fletcher, Bale, etc into the bowl? Who, in their respective pseudo-national teams, never will win anything? Thoughts from a German. (Yes, we have crazy Bavarians, but ‘we’ are all happy not to have different football squads anymore).

Riccardo on March 27, 2011 at 11:18 am

Absolutely a fair point, but to be honest I am a Scot and most of my countrymen would probably prefer that we never won anything than be part of a UK national team.

Diverinho on March 27, 2011 at 1:00 pm

It’s a miracle, in that respect, that Scotland and Wales indeed are not yet (not anymore?) independent nations/countries. Of course, before any sort of football-union could become realistic, the whole attitude and friendliness between the British regions would need to take a step to another level. No idea in how far that’d be wanted or despised by the respective sides. Possibly football could be the catalyst to help?
Looking at it, this is probably the weirdest thing in all of UEFA/FIFA. Not that we have Asian-ish countries like Turkey, Israel, Kazakhstan (and the likes) in the pool, but that there are subparts of one specific country. Not happening in the Olympics, btw…

TheIndomitableHardOn on March 29, 2011 at 11:07 pm

Diverinho – I think you’d better check your geography, last I checked N. Ireland wasn’t part of Britain. In fact your understanding of the area seems a bit weird on the whole. Better stick to Germany

unclesam on March 27, 2011 at 9:23 pm

How can you blame the population? Spain won the world cup, they have a smaller population than England. The Netherlands came second, they have a third of England’s population.

I’m Swedish. We use the population “card” a lot when we fail. That’s why we will never grow. You can’t use those excuses. Denmark are as good as Sweden, if not better, and they have half our population. Croatia are better than us, they have half our population.

If population meant success, then India or China would’ve won the World Cup.

It doesn’t come down to population, it comes down to players, the national team coach, team moral, football culture and the coaches in the country.

First of all, you can’t win the World Cup without a good group of players. That’s the basics.

Second, the manager of the national team has to be good tactically and build a system that can take on any team in the world and also instill confidence and passion into the team. Team moral comes into play here. Having a team that’s high on spirits and that feels a connection to the squad, the coach and the country is very important.

The footballing culture is also important. For example, in England or Italy you have no problem shooting up long balls for the forwards. In Spain this is basically a sin. The ball should leave the ground as little as possible. But culture doesn’t just come down to that. It’s the style of play and quite honestly, England do not have a consistent style. Playing direct balls, using two forwards, two box-to-box midfielders, and wide midfielders who don’t cut in isn’t a style of play, it’s basic football. For amateurs, basically. What England needs is something deeper.

Finally, the coaches in the country are important because they educate the players in the art of football.

I disagree. To think that England, or indeed any nation, should abandon its’ football roots and try to ape Spain is a nonsense. Most English people will tell you that the biggest problem England has had recently is a lack of Englishness. The last success of any kind England had was under Terry Venables because he played ‘English football’ and he kept the players happy and relaxed. Spurs are a good example. Redknapp played 4-4-2 with a big man – small man attack almost exclusively last year and triumphed over Mancini to the Champions League. This year he has matched or got the better of Wenger, Ancelotti, Benitez etc. I’m sure there are those who sneer at a ‘basic’ form of the game but one by one Spurs have wiped the smug smirk off each of their faces. The very last thing they need is someone like Guardiola. Juande Ramos said after leaving Spurs (bottom of the league) that he was surprised how little the players knew tactically about football. Now they are in the Champions League quarter-final and he is…? Wiki says Dnipro Dnipropetrovsk! Ha ha ha! ‘Educating’ them on the art of football, is he?

And the idea you could change everything at the youth level and grow it over 10 – 15 years is like saying you could change the country’s language by teaching the kids only german. It’s not workable. And it’s not desireable either. England has as many World Cups as Spain, which is hardly any. Not the best model to imitate, methinks.

http://twitter.com/#!/JohnGM1 i dont post on this website so how could you be me. Go get a job, girlfriend, or a hobby

Lmfao on April 2, 2011 at 10:13 am

Hey could you start putting links under your comments to draw more traffic to the site it would really be appreciated.lol fail.

Josef on March 28, 2011 at 10:16 pm

“Which teams *aren’t* going to look a tad inferior in comparison to Barcelona?!”

Spain.

Diverinho on March 29, 2011 at 11:09 pm

Spain do look inferior to Barca. They don’t have that same crazy closing down Spain have. Barca are like Spain on steroids!

DARREN WILSON on March 30, 2011 at 4:40 am

yes but Spain are not “inferior” are they..????..they are a different interpretation to Barca; for instance they do not possess someone like Alves to patrol the entire right hand side of the midfiled do they (i havent even mentioned Messi..)

I have played Barcelona versus Spain on FIFA 11 on the PS3 ten times, computer versus computer, 20 minute matches, and Barcelona won seven times (Spain won three times, curiously no draws). I chose a neutral venue though I could do a study to see the effect of home advantage if people were interested. I could also do a study on the xbox as I’m staying over at my cousins’ this weekend and he has one, though we would have to rent the game. Opinions?

Truthandinsight on March 27, 2011 at 12:16 am

Barnesy10 –

I like your comment about English players not being very good at playing “possession” football – i.e. keeping and recycling the ball in tight sitiuations – English players definitely need to improve that across the board – but surely that comes down to what they are doing at their clubs – take Arsenal for instance (and therefore Wilshere), who are the best “possession” team in England (and one of the best in Europe – behind Barca of course) – I was talking to a friend of mine who is an up-and-coming football agent (he represents a couple of players at Plymouth Argyle and other small clubs – like I say, up-and-coming) who is also an Arsenal fan, and he tells me that the reason Arsenal players are able to play in the way they do is basically because their training revolves around little “Keep-Ball” sessions where they are constantly having to control the ball and move it around in tight, confined spaces quickly.

It is my understanding (from my Agent friend) that they do this type of training a lot – i.e. more than any other type of training (Arsenals training regime itself came under criticism this week when the Wales Fitness coach – a Dutch Fitness Maverick who believes that most clubs over-train their players leaving them at below-peak condition for games and more susceptible to injuries, which Arsenal constantly have a problem with – revealed that Arsenal are top of his list of clubs he would criticise for over-training their players – I think I got that titbit from Guardian.co.uk’s fottball Podcast, which, incidently, ZM, yes, God himself, was actually on – see ZM – I know where you got to – Barca v Getafe and the Spanish 4th Division – I might be wrong about the Spanish 4th Division bit).

I also read that Daniel Sturridge said that Bolton’s training consists of playing 5-a-side every day (because the players enjoy it, therefore keeping the morale and team spirit up), with Bolton becoming one of the better english sides at playing possession football since Owen Coyle took over. Therefore I definitely think more English players (and therefore clubs) should be looking to improve their ball playing, retention and creativity skills (I’m basically agreeing with the point you are making, I’ve just taken the longest route there possible).

Regarding Rooney – we all know now that he doesn’t like having to peel off to the left anymore – I think Capello should play Rooney as a number 10, with instructions for him to drop back into midfield when England lose the ball and then bomb forward to link the play when England regain the ball, bringing in two wingers and the striker – i.e. a 4-4-2, but with Rooney acting as a third midfielder without the ball and a striker with the ball….

Cheers……

Mati on March 27, 2011 at 7:53 am

interesting comment. mind if I share my thoughts?

possession football is a mentality, a cultural thing. ZM going to the Spanish 4th division might have been the best way to see it as it is. the level of football is terrible, but the emphasis is on possession, always. the English mentality is just different (eg. parents aren’t encouraged to shut up during their kids’ 11-a-side games at the age of 9 or 10). during the game with Wales, England’s players lacked that little movement after passing or when a teammate moves with the ball into space. rarely did a teammate offer an option, and in return, there was no other player attempting to read the situation & continue the triangle to move the ball into positive space. Parker had a good game, but this was his job most of the time. him & Lampard left Johnson very exposed & with little options but to go long towards Young.

do Arsenal over-train because they’re atempting to instill a system that most of their players aren’t accustomed to? after a certain age players cannot evolve technically (recieving, passing, vision, instinct), only tactically (positioning, reading opposition). the difference here between the Gunners and Barcelona is the team’s core. Abidal was never reknowned for his passing & never will be, but hasn’t he become more comfortable with the ball? having a lot a of teammates who play in that style must help, no? who do Arsenal’s new signings rely on in these situations? who’s Arsenal’s core? then we go down the pathy of age, experiece, personality & unfulfilled promise…

Bolton under Coyle are something else. 5-aside games are, & i remember Pellegrini having them at Villarreal, because they improved familiarity, work in tight space, motivation & teamwork. teams such as Villarreal, Valencia, etc will never pass like Barcelona, but they will pass (back to the cultural thing) they will create triangles, they will give the ball to feet & move into space, they will start slow at the back & increase the pace upfront. you can’t teach this to grown ups (not this or one touch rondo’s, I’ve tried & failed miserably many times in many places around the world).

back to the game, Parker looked jittery but did what was needed, albeit against a very disappointing Welsh XI who have that bug i just love to hate…”GET RID OF IT!”, my God i hate those words. dull game really, & Wilshere seems to suffer next to Lampard, but thats not really a long-term problem. the issue in my opinion is what to do when the other big guns are fit & running. England must stop playing names & start playing players, gradually. the new system seemed OK, but again, weak opposition. work has to be done on transitions from back to front.

Barnesy10 on March 27, 2011 at 5:36 pm

Both brilliant points, can’t disagree with anything that you’ve said.

Mati, I have to concur with your observation on the cultural aspect of football. I believe that this is the most important point and that a fundamental change has to be made if the England team wish to be successful in the future. Trevor Brooking bangs on about it constantly; and the continued delay to a national centre, ala Clairefontaine, only exacerbates the problem.

Unfortunately, I believe there is a deeper cultural issue that needs to be resolved if the English national team are to progress. It is of no surprise that the one English player to display any awareness of how the game is played at the top level, Jack Wilshere, has been moulded at a very young age under the tutelage of Wenger and Brady at Arsenal. I play football every Sunday morning and when I play at home there is a youth game (under 10’s -11’s, I think) that is played on a full sized pitch, with full sized goals. Crazy.

Now the deeper cultural issue that I was alluding to before, and was touched on by Mati, is the need for the football masses to be educated; but these masses usually consist of parents and supporters shouting such useful encouragement as: ‘Get it down the line!’; ‘They don’t like it up ‘em!’ etc etc. Football in England is essentially a working class game with working class roots. Coming from that background myself, reading anything other than ‘The Sun’ is a declaration of your homosexuality. Couple this with the general tendency in England of anti-intellectualism and you have a problem.

I find it amusing to read in papers, websites, blogs etc that England played well against Wales when, in reality, all their flaws were exposed all the more as the excuse that the opposition were world class does not exist. Wenger cannot educate all the young players in this country so there has to be an education across the board; and that includes coaches, journalists and supporters – not just the young players, who need to be gotten a hold of at a much earlier age.

Mati, as for your point concerning Wilshere and Lampard, I completely agree. Lampard is an amazing box-to-box midfielder, but as has been pointed out by either ZM or Jonathan Wilson (I can’t remember) these players are really of little use in the modern game. Their duties have shifted to the full back position, where Dani Alves is an arch exponent. What Lampard isn’t so good at, and probably why he isn’t as effective at international level, is his inability to play those patterns in the middle of the pitch; therefore, England cede momentum and possession. Wilshere seemed to figure this out in the second half, and instead of passing to Lampard, he tried hopeful balls over the top.

Truthandinsight on March 28, 2011 at 2:06 pm

Hi Barnesy, good post, but I want to pick you up on something – our opinions on Frank Lampard clearly seem to differ – you said that he’s an “amazing box-to-box midfielder” – I don’t agree, and I’ll explain why:

Frank’s best form came in a Chelsea shirt under Mourinho. Franks role in that team was not as a box-to-box midfielder, but as an attacking midfielder, with a defensive midfielder clearing up behind him (Makele). Frank was actually the chief playmaker in that Chelsea team – all the Chelsea play went through him. His other role was to get into the box as much as possible and get on the end of wing-play from Robben and Duff, and/or collect the ball at the edge of the box when it came back from the opposing defenders and shoot it into the net (which he was brilliant at doing). Frank’s passing ability was not poor, but the main difference between that Chelsea team and England the other day is that (I’ve banged on about this already on this forum, but I’ll say it again – ) Rooney did not want to stay out wide and wait for the ball but kept coming inside and trying to join up with play in the middle. What this meant was that the England play became too narrow, with Wales able to pack the middle of the pitch, leaving Frank no outlet to move the ball onto, and meaning that because there were more Welsh players around him he kept getting caught in possession. Now, I agree that Frank is no Xavi (perhaps Xavi would have performed better than Frank in the same situation), but when Chelsea played, Robben didn’t drift inside so much for the ball, meaning opposition teams were always STRETCHED, giving Frank just enough time to manipulate the ball and move it on (i.e. keeping play going).

I am a West Ham fan, and I can tell you that when Frank played for West Ham he DEFINITELY played a box-to-box role, and was not considered anything special (indeed, Stevie G was the best English up-and-coming box-to-box midfielder, and Joe Cole was considered the young West Ham player with the most talent) – Chelsea bought him cos he was available, young (with potential) and decent – and lived in London.

I would say that Frank has become better at being a box-to-box midfielder (I think he was our best player against ze Germans at the World Cup – he was playing a box-to-box role in that game).

Other than my above deep-rooted opinion about Frank Lampard, I thought all of your points were spot on.

Truthandinsight on March 28, 2011 at 9:05 am

Well, theres lots of interesting points being made here, and I think we all agree that the “English” footballing mentality (including the refereeing) needs to change for the England team to move forward (basically, we’re al saying that Spain has taught us a lesson).

What I would say about the current England team is: uclesam mentioned the National Team manager needs to be good tactically – well, up until now, Capello has been anything but good tactically (since the World Cup I’ve been vociferous on this forum about how rubbish I think his team selections and tactics were at the World Cup – perversely he probably got his tactics just right against Wales yesterday by playing three in midfield – we’ll see how long he keeps it up). As well as that, the players need to be given roles hat suit them and get the best out of them – Capello again is failing at that (the England team yesterday would DEFINITELY have struggled against stronger opposition) – Lampards best days came when Chelsea played a system where he was able to get forward into the box at will and link-up play with the striker and also join the striker up front. Now you may say that he was given the same type of role yesterday, but when Chelsea played this way their two wide men (usually Robben and Duff) satyed wide as much as possible, leaving Frank the space in the middle to burst forward and do his stuff. The reason this didn’t work for him yesterday is because he had Rooney constantly coming inside from the left trying to link-up play (instead of staying out wide, which is probably what Capello wanted Rooney to do – basically, Rooney was the big White-Elephant in the team yesterday, and had a poor game because of it), basically doing the job that Frank was supposed to be doing – the system Capello used was the right one but the personnel he used to implement it were the wrong one’s (England still managed to win because Wales were so poor).

We saw this type of thing happen under Eriksson – Beckham – the right midfielder – kept coming into the middle and collecting the ball off the centre-backs (which Gerrard and others should have been doing) and trying to dictate play, unbalancing the shape of the team cos he sould have been waiting on the right-wing to receive the ball and cross it etc. So we’re seeing now that our last THREE England managers (I’m including McClaren in this – but I think he’d actually be quite good now if he came back, that ‘aint gonna happen though…..) have turned out to not be good enough (Capello still has time to change that perception of himself, but I don’t think he will).

Truthandinsight on March 28, 2011 at 9:15 am

Until we get the right manager who can put the right players in the right system, and then motivate them to go out and give their all then the England team is not going to fulfill its potential (a lot has been said after the World Cup that perhaps our players are not as good as we think they are – I don’t agree with that at all – I definitely think we’ve got good enough players to get to the semi-finals of every tournament we play in – but the manager has not benn right for ages now…..). The last time we did well as an England team, was in Euro 96, when we had Terry Venables as manager who DID pick players and a system that worked well together – also, Glenn Hoddle was doing a good job until a: Beckham allowed himself to get wound-up, and b: he turned out to be a spiritualist nut-bar.

I think the man for the job now is probably Harry Redknapp. We’ll see what happens as time goes on…….

Paps on March 26, 2011 at 11:03 pm

Would like to see what Capello does when Gerrard’s fit..
Maybe he’ll drop him without telling him

Diverinho on March 26, 2011 at 11:03 pm

Wow, a long time since I saw England playing 4-3-3. Watched the first half, and found in general they played very well. I especially liked Bent’s and Young’s performances. Rooney I found not that bad, he kind of did his job by keeping Wales’s right side busy. Not his luckiest day though. I see that 4-3-3 working well against practically any team, Capello should continue that road.

Maxim on March 27, 2011 at 12:11 am

All in all, a very slow paced, uneventful match (first 14mins aside). England looked assured in possession as ZM mentioned, but for me were more impressive off it. I like Ashley Young for England, but do agree that Parker was MOTM. He pressed very well.

Rooney with a needless booking too – hope we don’t miss him too much against Switzerland.

Wales did not have a shot on target – which either means they were very poor, or England defended very well. I’d go with the former. Wales had nothing today.

March Madness update Butler advance to tha final four for second straight year dont sleep on da bulldogs

juliano on March 27, 2011 at 12:33 am

good formation, but with gerrard and walcott back the problems will be starting all over again…

funny that the best left-footed english winger since… well, i don’t know, prefers to play in the right-wing

Locost on March 27, 2011 at 2:07 am

Clearly a better performance.

Cruyff’s observation that 4-3-3 creates more triangles than 4-4-2 making ball retention easier seems to have rubbed off on Capello who must by now realise England need all the help to keep the ball they can get.

Rooney on the left and Young on the right also meant England have joined the trend towards inverted wingers too!

Let’s hope the improvement can be carried over into games against tougher opposition.

The talk about the value of posession for Barcelona above reminds me of Shankley’s old dictum “The ball goes from me, then to you, then to someone else and all the time the organisation of the oppposition is changing. Eventually someone will sneak in”

Konsta K. on March 27, 2011 at 10:51 am

If you’re talking about Ashley Young, he is definitely right-footed.

Lars on March 28, 2011 at 1:37 am

I think he means Adam Johnson.

PK on March 27, 2011 at 5:08 am

Following England can be very confusing. One day the press tell me Lampard’s internationial career is over, next he starts amd scores in a qualifier. Very strange.

Ed on March 27, 2011 at 12:06 pm

I think Capello may have started with three central midfielders against Kazakhstan in a World Cup qualifier back in 2008 – with Barry, Gerrard and Lampard playing behind Heskey, Rooney and Walcott. But they switched to 4-4-2 for the second period.

JediRage on March 27, 2011 at 12:58 pm

Congratulations England for beating … Wales?

LAWL

dearieme on March 27, 2011 at 10:48 pm

It’s rather odd, switching around between 4-3-3 and 4-4-2 when the team isn’t selected to fit the pattern, nor is it selected on form. I’m thinking of the repeated selection of the much diminished Rooney – and, in earlier days, of the repeated selection of Gerrard and Lampard, who never seemed to bring their club form to an England side.

Locost on March 28, 2011 at 1:22 am

Having seen the highlights (I’m in OZ) must say I was impressed by the first goal (Terry stepping out to participate in a passing movement was nice) but do worry that the second came from a 40 yarder played into the channel by the full back.

Not quite the slick passing game I was hoping to see.

Oh well

Anonymous on March 28, 2011 at 10:13 am

Parker was very good, he should have made the world cup squad. He had the performances and press attention that normally gets someone in.

When you said
“Parker was England’s best player, showing discipline and restraint in the deep-lying role – something England haven’t had for a long time.”

Did you mean we hadn’t had anyone playing the deep-lying role recently or that we hadn’t had anyone play it with discipline and restraint?

Although normally in a midfield 2 Gareth Barry has generally been our deepest midfield player, and while his performances have been disappointing (and worse at the world cup) I’ve never thought he lacked discipline and restraint?

Also tactical inflexibility is often levelled at British sides, do you think the success of England’s 4-3-3 was more down to Wales inability to adapt to it then us playing it well (although most players would have played a variant of it at club level).

Truthandinsight on March 28, 2011 at 10:37 am

I said in one of my comments above that Englands tactics were correct (in that they nulified Wales’ desire to play the ball through midfield – Wales just weren’t good enough at keeping the ball – Vaughan should have played from the start – he’s playing in a Blackpool team who are renowned for playing the ball through midfield well this season), but the reason they didn’t score more than the two goals they did score (and why the second half was really boring) was because they had the wrong people playing in roles that didn’t suit them – i.e. Rooney is not suited to playing wide-left anymore cos he wants to come inside and link play too much – Wales were able to nullify the majority of Englands attacks because of this imbalance.

Also, on Scott Parker/Gareth Barry – Parker is a naturally more tenacious tackler than Barry, and I think is actually a better passer of the ball than Barry is – I’d expect to see him play ahead of Barry for England for some time now…..

RedMan on March 28, 2011 at 3:34 pm

I would like to give a mention to Darren Bent. Probably not England’s best striker, but in terms of tactics, his movement was important for this 433 system, which was something that Rooney (at least not this year’s Rooney), Crouch, Cole or Defoe (maybe) can offer

Mati on March 28, 2011 at 3:58 pm

@ Barnesy10 & Truthandinsight

it was getting crowded up there

I’ll have to agree with T&I on the Lampard not being a box-to-box (pretty sure a Jonathan Wilson observation). to be honest, I wouldn’t even know how/where to play him if I had to manage a team he plays in because in my opinion his characteristics are too sporadic & cannot be categorized into a specific position. maybe, that’s why he flourished under Mourinho? he can shoot, has the intelligence to time his runs, can pass a good ball or two through & retreat to add defensive numbers. his role at Chelsea hid his deficincies (slow, no agility, not comfortable under pressure, no flair, tackling). I’m not trying to berate him, its just an observation.

regarding the cultural barriers that influence young players’ development, I think we’ve all touched on the negative aspects, but why isn’t there a solution already? for example, how’s the Brazilian Soccer School coming along? Liverpool’s ex-Barca staff’s unfluence on the academy? or even the English Clairefontaine that has been mentioned so many times? (forgive me if the examples are out-dated, I haven’t been keeping up with England for a while). The current system doesn’t need a complete overhaul does it? if so, it’ll take decades to see the results. I think minor tweaks need to be installed to give the young players more freedom to express themselves, more margins for trial0&-error, more contact with the ball, understanding of different positions & roles on he pitch, etc. England’s working class identity in football should never be taken away, but accomodated to modern football, flexible to change & welcmong of new ideas. in Italy, there are complaints about 7-a-side games for 11 year olds, and Argentina are contemplating modernising their youth development programme, England should do something too (both aformentioned nations have smaller populations & more titles).

finally, & probably most importantly, England’s finest football journalists, in my opinion, are too far away from England, and that’s a problem! if the same old journalists who don’t understand the game continue to misinform the general public, there cannot be progress. just ask ZM why he started this blog. lack of intellectual tactical analysis & disscusion in the UK’s media. football is a passion, & it shouldn’t be expressed in only one way.

great disscusion guys

Truthandinsight on March 28, 2011 at 5:06 pm

Hi Mati, thanks for the reply,

Your paragraph on Frank Lampard at the top there is completely spot-on, in my opinion. You make another interesting point about Journalism – there is a bit more in-depth tactical insight being given in the media than there used to be – guardian.co.uk champions ZM and also employ David Pleat to give tactical analysis of big games after the event (David Pleat has done a tactical breakdown of the England and Wales game, which you can read here –

– his analysis of the Welsh play is the most interesting part for us on this Forum, cos he’s basically saying Wales should have played a long-ball game up to two strikers running the channels, thereby turning the England defenders – definitely quite the opposite to the style of football we’ve been championing on this Forum, although, with Terry and Dawson both being quite slow, he’s probably got it right.), and maybe there will now start to be more tactical analysis across the media, which can only be a good thing for educating the mass of people in this country who don’t know much more than “Get it up the Line” etc.

Another aspect I’ll throw into this is the refereeing in this country (something that has also been discussed before on this website). The reason Teams like Stoke, Bolton of old (under Sam Allardyce, in fact, ANY team that Big Sam has managed) and others are able to survive and establish themselves at Premier League level is because the refereeing allows them to play a more rugged, physical type of game, meaning they rely on power and set-piece prowess to score goals and ultimately defend and stop teams scoring, rather than play possession football and try to outplay teams and open them up in open play. Once the English players play games using foreign referees (i.e. at international level) they are unable to use their physicality in the same way as they can in the Premier League, and their play suffers and they get found out for not being good enough ball-players (the only English club that could supply a midfielder at 19 who is good enough for the England team is Arsenal, because they don’t play the traditional power-game that other teams are allowed to get away with – the refereeing probably is part of the reason Arsenal keep failing miserably – they are allowed to be put under the type of pressure by other Premier League teams that they are not set up to handle).

Now, I’m not totally against this style of refereeing as such (I am against, however, the frequent basic mistakes and poor decisions that referee’s are constantly guilty of over here, but thats a subject for a different discussion entirely), because it has allowed the Premier League to become the most exciting League in the world (this coming weekend, EVERY single Premier League has a meaning at the top or bottom of the table – the quality in this season’s PL hasn’t been the best, but the excitement has been second-to-none), but we must recognise and accept that the refereeing in this country has now had a detrimental effect on the England National teams chances (we have basically sacrificed our National Teams standards for a more exciting Premier League and Champions League – don’t forget – the English Champions League teams have only a small smattering of English players in their teams).

Once the key people accept and understand that (the media, the F.A. and others) then they can either chose to change things for the benefit of the England team, or say “actually, we like things just as they are, lets leave it, and the England team will just have to try and improve regardless”. I don’t think the key people do accept and understand that yet, so there won’t be a foreseeable change in Englands fortunes.

Any other thoughts you guys have I’d be happy to read – cheers……

Barnesy10 on March 28, 2011 at 7:36 pm

T&I, interesting point regarding the refereeing in England. I believe that this goes back to the cultural aspect of English football that we were discussing earlier. Apart from a goal, the next loudest cheer you’ll hear in an English stadium will be for a bone-crunching tackle. This attitude permeates football from the grassroots upwards; and nothing frustrates me more on a Sunday morning than when a passing move (which doesn’t happen often, admittedly) breaks down and you can here the complaints from the sidelines and on the pitch: ‘Stop fucking fannying around with it!!!’. Doesn’t encourage the rondo, I can tell you.

Personally, I can take or leave the English national team BUT I would absolutely loathe for the refereeing in this country to mirror what we see on the continent. I enjoy a tackle and the physical aspect of the game, but as you can probably tell from these posts, I’m no Vinny Jones. Nevertheless, the physical aspect of football is an integral part of the game; and lesser skilled sides should be allowed, within the laws, to use their physicality to compete. Spanish football especially, can be extremely frustrating to watch as the whistle is going non-stop. It’s almost like 11-a-side futsal and not football at all really.

For all the poor quality football that the Premier League produces, I must admit, I’ll take it over Spain, Italy, France etc any day. In that sense, maybe it’s a double edged sword; but like I said, I have no great love for the national team so I don’t want the refereeing to change, only the attitude. Arsenal have proved though, that the beautiful game can be played on these shores. Unfortunately, the refereeing in this country will almost certainly become even more sanitised, so I’ll enjoy it while it lasts.

Ho Ho Ho, yes he was, but he is very knowledgeable when it comes to football tactics…….

…….and besides, have you seen what he looks like? – If you looked like that then you’d definitely have to pay to get it…….

Ewan on March 28, 2011 at 5:33 pm

I love to read these analyses and the comments section as it always reminds me that not EVERY football fan in England is a commitment-obsessed Shawcross-lover, and that many are as interested in the tactics of football like myself. And not all of us are bigots like Lawrenson, or ignorant like Chiles who was disappointed that Wilshere isn’t the answer to England’s defensive midfield issue. Idiot.

Totally agree with these comments. The mentality of football in England needs to change, but honestly I can’t see it happening for a long time, and those of us that have watched children’s sunday league football know why. However, I like to think that I’m making a difference, in that I coach a group of 8 year olds and every week I make them do lots of piggy-in-the-middle sort of drills; to improve their touch, first time passing and ability in small areas. Every week the area they do this in becomes smaller and I hope that I can make them into a mini-Villarreal or Shakhtar. I’m an ambitious 18 year old, I should say.

In terms of the team, I think this is certainly a good first step on the track to becoming a good team. 4-2-3-1 is certainly the modern day international formation (unless Capello becomes brave enough to dip into the South American/particularly Chilean mould) as it has such versatility. You’d only have to look at the success of Spain, Holland, Brazil and Germany in the world cup to see that. All with different variants of the 4-2-3-1. It’d suit England perfectly, with Jack either sitting deep with Parker, or given more freedom in a sort of 4-1-4-1 like on Saturday. Another crucial advantage of it is the freedom it could give to Johnson and Cole, two full-backs that are fantastic in attack. I feel that with them making runs from deep (probably one at a time, think Alves) the double pivot would still give enough protection. This particularly applies to Cole, as it is likely that whoever is playing on the left (be it Rooney, Gerrard, Young, Milner) will move centrally often.

Realistically, although a good midfield now, it’s not realistic for the future (Parker and Lampard are unlikely to be able to play big roles in Brazil in 2014), although right now I can’t think of who would be there with Jack. Rodwell maybe? Anyway, that’s off the point. I think this is the right formation and Capello ought to stick with it. I’d reserve judgement on players in a lot of positions until I’d seen them tested in this formation.

Anyway, that’s probably enough. I must say that I’m not passionate about England but I love to watch them with detachment and purely analytical. I couldn’t possibly get passionate about Terry, Gerrard etc. I’d love to hear any comments you have about all I’ve had to say.

Barnesy10 on March 28, 2011 at 7:41 pm

Ewan, I’m interested, what size games do your 8 year olds play and on what sized pitch?

Ewan on March 28, 2011 at 11:52 pm

At the moment they don’t play league matches. I coach for a club whose ideals are based around bringing enjoyment back, and kicking the typical English culture (the negative side of it, i should say). So in my team, they train on a saturday morning and on the last saturday of every month they play a tournament together (the squad is made of 50 players, the biggest at the 13 team club, the oldest of which I just finished playing for). Those tournaments, and the games at the end of training sessions are played on a pitch the length of the width of a 7-a-side pitch, and are 5/6-a-side. Next year they will enter a 7-a-side league, as is club policy, but I hope that the mini-philosophy that we’ve instilled will continue (I won’t know, as I’ll probably be at university for the most part).

Unfortunately, the current ruling of the leagues is that at under-11s they will be converted into 11-a-side teams, which, if you’ve ever watched a team below the age of 15 play, is ridiculous. This is a key issue of English grass-roots football.

Also, I should say, I don’t slave-drive them with piggy-in-the-middle like some sort of Barcelona dictator, but a lot of the session is based around it and the kids enjoy it for the most part. After I posted that, I realised that it seemed that way.

Darrenham on March 29, 2011 at 9:55 am

“England had opportunities to counter but their transitions were poor – lazy, perhaps – and they didn’t really look to get a third.”

That’s the only negative to be drawn from an England point of view, and something we see all too often in England games, even when a goal is necessary. I’m not sure what the issue is.

Either way, I was very happy with the tactical sensibility shown with the 4-3-3, would rather not see Lampard as forward looking midfielder though, I think Gerrard would perhaps be the better option. Both are short-term considerations though, and England should be looking at AMs who can take the mantle from them.

DARREN WILSON on March 30, 2011 at 5:06 am

some very good posts on here, and i must admit it is great to see such discourse rather than the usual snipping bewteen posters (which at times i am guilty off…), it has been a real pleasure to just sit back and read what folk think about the game….keep up the good work guys, and well done to the ZM team…

Truthandinsight on March 30, 2011 at 8:09 pm

Hi Darren, nice post to put up, and there are some people who post on here that can’t seem to help but be rude but I’ve found the majority are top people so far……